[ThinkPlease]

Looking at these articles, it isn't exactly what Mr. Watson has assumed, though, is it? I see no mention of the specific (or even general) assumptions which he has made to reach his conclusions.

[Southack]

"Looking at these articles, it isn't exactly what Mr. Watson has assumed, though, is it? I see no mention of the specific (or even general) assumptions which he has made to reach his conclusions." - ThinkPlease

You must be a quick reader!

All of those articles, and thousands more just like them, share the same assumption that valid data can sequence itself without intelligent aid from a primordial soup (or kitchen, in the case of at least one article). After all, to get a living organism, we have to have a valid sequence of base pairs in its DNA structure.

That's precisely what you have agreed with me (above) that the author of the math for this thread has properly calculated.

[Southack]

"Looking at these articles, it isn't exactly what Mr. Watson has assumed, though, is it? I see no mention of the specific (or even general) assumptions which he has made to reach his conclusions." - ThinkPlease

"The primordial pond (or ponds) produced not just one or two, but millions, perhaps billions of "seed cells" which are analogous to a zygote (a fertilized egg). These seed cells were formed in the pond by the random assembly of: (1) new genes, (2) parts of previously-made viable genomes, and (3) other biochemicals, all of which existed in the pond." - Periannan Senapathy, Ph.D.